Career CFO vents her frustration over business, human capital, economics, social environment, culture, politics, and everything else; but always with a monetary twist

January 2012 posts

January 31, 2012

"Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II" (written by Steve Kloves, based on a novel by J.K. Rowling's):

HARRY POTTER

We have to go there, now.

HERMIONE GRANGER

What? We can't do that! We've got to plan! We've got to figure out --

HARRY POTTER

Hermione! When have any of our plans ever worked? We plan, we get there, all hell breaks loose!

And that, my dear readers, in a nutshell, is the principal difference between the two action-plan extremists.

In the red corner, equipped by multipage projections with color graphs and tables, are those who believe that strategic planning is the only way of life and one must ponder and weigh every situational possibility before taking any step forward (or backward). In the blue corner, wearing their firefighting suits with confidence and valor, are those who are convinced that when the shit hits the fan they will be able to immediately assess the entire spectrum of life-threatening circumstances and successfully handle the crisis.

Any kind of extremism is bad, kids, m'kay? In religion, politics, personal views, and business management. Different situations require different approaches. Only a balanced combination of executive instruments, including long- and short-term plans as well as emergency-response methodology, can guarantee an enterprise's ability to efficiently evolve and weather any dangers that constantly arise in the volatile commercial environment.

In my book, "CFO Techniques", I have devoted an entire section (Part VIII) to strategies and planning as crucial components of CFOs' and controllers' functionality - the important responsibilities that change financial managers from bean-counters to CEOs' executive partners. Participating in analysis of opportunities and construction of well-devised action scenarios offers us a possibility to affect companies in the most significant way. Remember, that those executives who let companies run their course without looking into the future and carefully plotting their steps for further development, leave the businesses vulnerable in the face of the fast-advancing competition.

On the other hand, crisis management efforts applied in situations that present themselves without any warning are of extreme importance as well, particularly in small and midsize businesses, which are highly susceptible to the slightest deviations in market, financial, economic, and political environment. Moreover, these companies frequently have less than sufficient reserves to tide them over tough times. Implementation of a disaster-rescue mission requires high level of composure and rationalization. Those who've read my "About" note know that I consider my "fire-fighting" skills to be the most valuable to my employers and clients.

It is a mistake to think, though, that even a very experienced CFO can wing it without contemplating some sort of advance "what-if" scenarios. In fact, a crisis management policy is just another form of a strategic plan. On top of that, proper preparation for emergencies requires broader expertise and deeper knowledge of various commercial, marketing, technological, financial, legal, and organizational matters.

The truth is that a successful executive must be capable of devising a carefully-weighed and calculated strategic development plan with all visual bells and whistles her digital arsenal can afford, but in her special folder she always keeps a set of comprehensive tactical procedures for effective extinguishment of fires and post-disaster survival.

January 30, 2012

"A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon it adds up to real money."

Senator Everett Dirksen

The Frustrated CFO's note:

According to Wikipedia's article on the US Public Debt, as of January 9th, 2012 the gross debt was $15.23 trillion, of which $10.48 trillion was held by the public (i.e. in government issued securities, such as T-bills owned by investors like you) and $4.75 trillion was in intragovernmental holdings, such as, for example, the Social Security Trust Fund (i.e. backed by your money anyway).

I urge you to watch the 1965 video below and pay attention to the numbers that were the subject of Senator Dirksen's concern back then.

January 24, 2012

The inner conflict many intelligent people experience over Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA), is an old problem for me. For many years before the pharmaceutical and media lobbies brought the issue of proprietary rights infringement in the Internet age to Washington DC, I've been torn between two firm believes of mine: (1) that content creators (writers, musicians, artists, designers, etc.) are entitled to get paid whenever their creative products are used for commercial purposes (i.e. to make money), and (2) that the information available on the Internet cannot be restricted by any means.

That's why more than 10 years ago, I thought of Napster as a violator of musicians' rights to financially benefit from their products. It was obvious to me that the whole purpose of the "file-sharing service" was Sean Parker's publicity stunt to show off the Fanning brothers' technological platform with a purpose of selling it and profiting from it (which is exactly what happened).

YouTube, whose owners obviously always intended to capitalize on the advertising, is also at fault when it lets the users to upload copyrighted material without paying the content owners royalty out of their revenues. On the other hand, I don't see anything wrong with YouTube being a promotional portal for young artists, musicians, filmmakers, and such (including the crazy exhibitionists catering to voyeurs), who upload their own creations knowingly in hopes of receiving the tangible benefits of being noticed.

Of course, the most conflicting entity is Google. On one hand, we cannot exist without their search engine (I am well aware that there are geeky alternatives out there, but let's face it - Google dominates); on the other hand, when it comes to the Internet advertising they are the closest example of a monopoly we've got in our screwed up economy. Moreover, Google attains its riches by using every single one of us, the information-seeking users. Ultimately, it's in their interests to tag counterfeiters and bootleggers, because users are looking for them. And I guess they know that their hands are not exactly clean. Why else would they settle with the Department of Justice to pay $500 million for allowing Canadian Pharmacies' advertisement?

Presently the issue of the online copyright infringement hits very close to home for me. A bunch of unlicensed eBook-hacking sites are offering "CFO Techniques" downloads for free. Neither me nor my publisher is getting a single penny out of this, while the sites' owners get advertising income, revenues on sales of their users' information, and ability to pollute the hapless freeloaders' computers with the spyware invisibly attached to the plug-ins required for viewing the books. They profit unfairly using MY PRODUCT. And that's not fair.

Still, even this wouldn't force me to support the half-assed anti-constitutional laws like SOPA and PIPA. Why? Because if these laws are passed, I could go to jail for offering my readers a clip from "So, I Married an Axe Murderer" within my post about The Best Boss in Cinematic History , even though I derive no material benefits from this blog (none at all). I'd rather people steal my shit than go along with freedom of speech violations in the name of copyrights protection.

Yet, I am all for fighting piracy in an intelligent way that doesn't take our civil liberties away. And the "financial benefit" criteria seems to my CFO mind like a sensible approach. If a site takes any form of payments or generates advertising revenue through deliberate peddling (not just illustrative usage) of unlicensed and unpaid for content, the enablers of payment processing and advertising portals should stop providing their services to this site. This would be not much different than YouTube's actions under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA): they get a notice and remove the violating content.

Money is the key. I always said that the best way to fight terrorism is going after the financial sources. The now supposedly dead Osama Bin Laden without his multimillion wealth would've been just a thug on the street. Facebook without the advertisement revenue would be just a well-designed electronic hangout with no prospects for an IPO (expected in May this year).

January 19, 2012

In my book "CFO Techniques" I praised the U.S. Small Business Administration agency (SBA) for its role in supporting small businesses, particularly with their loan-backing program, and the amazing informational gold mine that is SBA.gov site - literally, the best resource out there. It's no surprise that when CNN's news flash quoted in the title of this post has arrived into my mailbox last week, it immediately caught my eye.

You've got to admire the skills of the public relation specialists in Washington (I wish my publisher's PR department was as masterful, or at least as industrious)! Look at the words selection: "elevate to a cabinet-level." Wow! Sounds like the president is going to take the "lowly peasant" (never mind facilitation of over $30 billion in loans per year and $570-million budget) and magically transport it to Mount Olympus to reside there with gods. And how democratic! The whole agency is being "elevated," as if all of its 2000 employees can be members of the cabinet. Some people may even think that this will empower the small businesses and their interests will become "special" - just like the ones of pharmaceutical giants, auto manufacturers, big oil, and mining conglomerates.

In reality, the only person who immediately benefits from this move is the SBA's Administrator, Karen Mills. She has become a member (already listed on www.whitehouse.gov/administration/) of Obama's cabinet and now will rub shoulders with the likes of Hillary Clinton and Janet Napolitano.

Whether Ms. Mills' accomplishments at SBA (or credits she takes for her subordinates' accomplishments) justify her new status could be a subject of an investigative journalism exercise. If it's White House's conclusion that she is the best candidate for providing the President with the advice on the only opportunity to save this country's economy, i.e. cultivation and support of the small-business environment, then be it.

I am more interested in the actions that will follow this first step in what being hailed as a program for raising "international competitiveness of American companies." You see, SBA is not meant to remain a cabinet-level agency for too long. In fact, it's not meant to stay a government agency at all. The intention is to "merge" SBA, along with the Export-Import Bank (ExIm), the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, the Trade and Development Agency, the Office of the Trade Representative, into the Department of Commerce (already a member of the Cabinet).

Whether they will continue calling this newly formed government Chimera the Department of Commerce or find it a new name (the way it happened with the Homeland Security), it is obvious that the already existing ministry will absorb all those other entities and, as it always happens, with the loss of independence, their functionality will be stunted.

Look, what happened when HMOs started swallowing far more flexible smaller health insurance providers and formed such giants as Aetna, CIGNA, Health Net, and United Health? Did it make anything better for members? Of course not, we all know this: the premiums went up and the coverage got worse.

Do consumers and businesses benefit from the crazy wave of bank mergers we have experienced in the past 25 years? Again, no. The services get worse and the fees get higher (plus, the process contributes to unemployment).

Any type of consolidation cannot be considered an improvement. It's done for a show - to demonstrated that something cardinal is done. The results? Who cares?

In case of SBA, this is really a shame, because they have made already and could've continued making a significant positive impact on the struggling entrepreneurial business sector. Now, their good initiatives will be drowned in public policies, fiscal regulations, national directives, and all that other country-wide crap. Their micro-level approach will be gone forever.

I find it incredibly ironic that the entity dedicated to help small businesses will be remodeled as a part of a large-scale program.

January 12, 2012

We constantly read and hear about American students' low level of academic performance. They rank 23rd out of 57 nations participating in international testing. Researchers and public-policy makers have been trying to figure out the reasons for this abysmal show of intellectual power. The "education system" is usually blamed: different teaching methodologies, testing devices, and so on, and so forth.

In my opinion the problem has nothing to do with educational technicalities. It's has to do with obvious gradual degeneration of general public's intellectual abilities (blame it on the mobile devices' radiation, if you have to). Whatever the reason, fact remains: high-schoolers are doing worse and worse in all subjects.

The common sense should lead a logical person to a conclusion that the declining academic achievements translate into a reduction in college enrollments. If one cannot keep up in a secondary school, how can that person attempt to receive a quality post-secondary education, right? Wrong! Between 1989 and 1999 college enrollments increased only by 9%, but in the 10 years after that - by 38% (!!!), from 14.8 million to 20.4 million.

And, of course, it's not easy to get into Ivy League schools, which accept 10-20% of the applicants (well, my readers know my opinion about the quality of education there). Yet, more than 80% of colleges in this country accept every other applicant, and there are some with 100% acceptance rate. I mean, the colleges want money and they will lower their requirements to whatever levels in order to fill the seats in the lecture halls.

So, every year millions of young people who were not succeeding at the high school level enter post-secondary education system. Why do they do that instead of trying to start their own businesses, attempt creative pursuits, or go into honorable and well-paid blue collar trades, I have no clue, but it is what it is.

Now, those kids who had comparatively better grades, some artistic inclinations, and/or expect to utilize their parents connections in the future take pre-med, pre-law, finance, marketing, various arts and designs . Those who don't think, or don't need to think, about their survival head for liberal arts. So, who ends up taking accounting majors? Everyone else as long as they can count without using their fingers.

But accounting and taxation are not easy. To fully understand it one should possess propensity for conceptual thinking, analytical mind, ability to absorb high volumes of regulations, standards, codes. And I am just talking about basics. 30-35 years ago up to 50% of freshmen who signed up for accounting courses would drop out before the first midterm. Nowadays, they somehow struggle through and graduate. The best of them are snatched by the Big 4, the next tier by other large CPA firms and big-time corporations.

The rest end up in the small and midsize businesses and accounting firms. It's my plight to deal with them, exposing myself on daily basis to the devastating result of this natural selection process. In every company I observe the same thing: so much is wrong! The books of different corporations are co-mingled, revenues and costs recognized incorrectly, inventory is not valued properly, etc., etc. It's difficult for an entrepreneurial company to survive in the first place; the accounting incompetence drags them down even further.

Books are kept intuitively, as if rules and standards did not exist. The most shocking thing is that auditors look at all that and accept it. The main concerns appear to be that the bank balances are reconciled to the statements and the control accounts match with supporting schedules. The PRINCIPAL CORRECTNESS is irrelevant.

January 09, 2012

I apologize for mistakes made by Apress's PR people responsible for the press release (I definitely don't dispense advice on hardware selection, but I talk extensively about various accounting software). I hope that the direct quotes taken from the book will speak for themselves.